Zeiss Otus 1.4/55

I don't really have the resources for something like this but I am seriously a sucker for crazy sharp lenses. The contrast and IQ of the sample photos at 1.4 is nuts on this lens.

What do you guys think?

http://lenses.zeiss.co​m …lenses/otus/otu​s1455.html

I was mildly interested after reading the marketing, but after seeing the samples (with fantastic IQ, mind you), not at all convinced it has medium format quality like it would lead you to believe. Once I found out the price tag I just laughed.

Not for me.

Looks like they gave it a name and changed the barrel design since I've last seen it...

Well, you know, if you have a D800 or are saving for a future high-res Canon, you could invest in this if you want to do justice to all those megapixels, but don't want another camera...

However the whole "like medium format" marketing is kinda silly, in medium format you have a whole line of incredible lenses, whereas here you just have one really good lens, not talking about sensor differences. $4000 is a normal price for a medium format lens, but it's kind of stretching it here on 35mm, Leica notwithstanding.

Get a Pentax 645D or something if you really care about image quality.

I'm sure it's worthy it's price, but it's out of my reach.
I had the 50/1.4 ZE and sold it and have always missed it, now that I've seen the price on the Otus, I won't feel too bad buying the 50/1.4 back again.

Was just going to post about this, but due diligence prompted a search, denoting the existence of this thread. Anyway, lens is available for pre-order at B&H (and I'm sure other fine photographic establishments):

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …55mm_f_1_4_otus​_lens.html

oop; i made a post about this in the other forum; i'll delete. My general comment,

'If only it had AF..'; I'd consider selling a number of other lenses to bankroll.

canito wrote in post #16352851
I'm sure it's worthy it's price, but it's out of my reach.
I had the 50/1.4 ZE and sold it and have always missed it, now that I've seen the price on the Otus, I won't feel too bad buying the 50/1.4 back again.

The 50mm is probably the weakest performer in the Zeiss ZE line, some of the lenses are certainly very good, like the 135APO and 100MP, but none are actually made by Zeiss in Germany. In any case, it could have used a replacement.

If there is reason to believe that this lens is made in Germany, then four grand sounds a lot more reasonable, compared now to Leica's offerings.

But the biggest problem is that this should really have been an autofocus lens, at the very least Leica's cameras have a workable manual focus system, whereas DSLRs do not. This largely limits the appeal to shooters who don't mind using manual focus, like for studio work, landscape or architecture, but it also doesn't matter as much to the same people because any modern prime can look fantastic at f/8.

jbm7777 wrote in post #16352434
...What do you guys think?...

I hope to get one soon for testing.
From the images made with it, it looks very promising. I don´t like the lens outer design, but this is a smaller problem. It doesn´t matter as long as the lens works well for 40+ years. A lens that is earlier defective or bad usable because of deteriorated soft parts, oil, is not a very good lens for me.

Kolor-Pikker wrote in post #16352559
Looks like they gave it a name and changed the barrel design since I've last seen it...

Well, you know, if you have a D800 or are saving for a future high-res Canon, you could invest in this if you want to do justice to all those megapixels, but don't want another camera...

However the whole "like medium format" marketing is kinda silly, in medium format you have a whole line of incredible lenses, whereas here you just have one really good lens, not talking about sensor differences. $4000 is a normal price for a medium format lens, but it's kind of stretching it here on 35mm, Leica notwithstanding.

Get a Pentax 645D or something if you really care about image quality.

I am just curious did you actually own 645D and tested it against 800E ? From what I hear they are pretty much equal and it might be even a win for the Nikon in image quality.
First rate micro 4/3 sensor nowadays is pretty much better than APS-C sensor just 3-4 years ago. It is not a surprise that modern full frame is better than medium format sensor, particularly that all development resources devoted for medium format are from tiny companies compared to Canon and Nikon.

Kolor-Pikker wrote in post #16353007
The 50mm is probably the weakest performer in the Zeiss ZE line, some of the lenses are certainly very good, like the 135APO and 100MP, but none are actually made by Zeiss in Germany. In any case, it could have used a replacement.

If there is reason to believe that this lens is made in Germany, then four grand sounds a lot more reasonable, compared now to Leica's offerings.

But the biggest problem is that this should really have been an autofocus lens, at the very least Leica's cameras have a workable manual focus system, whereas DSLRs do not. This largely limits the appeal to shooters who don't mind using manual focus, like for studio work, landscape or architecture, but it also doesn't matter as much to the same people because any modern prime can look fantastic at f/8.

I use the Zeiss 21/2.8 on the 1Dx and it manually focuses very well. Even the focus confirmation on the 1Dx with my Zeiss lenses is very accurate. So, I wouldn't make a blanket statement that DSLR's don't have have a workable manual focus system unless you have actually tried to focus manually with your DSLR.

I also disagree that "any modern prime" can have comparable IQ at f/8. The color rendition, micro-contrast and sharpness of Zeiss lenses sets them apart and it's not just sharpness.

vaflower wrote in post #16353203
800E

Not this again.

I had a thought to write something, but another forum I visit has recently gotten over the whole D800E vs. MF bug, and I'd rather ignore this subject for a while.

I'll just say this - Instead of using phrases like "from what I hear", try the thing out for yourself, maybe you'll like it; I know people who own both and like both for different reasons. I myself would prefer to get into MF at the 60mp level, so I've been testing decidedly higher-end solutions as of late, but it would never be a replacement for a DSLR either.

notastockpikr wrote in post #16353284
I use the Zeiss 21/2.8 on the 1Dx and it manually focuses very well. Even the focus confirmation on the 1Dx with my Zeiss lenses is very accurate. So, I wouldn't make a blanket statement that DSLR's don't have have a workable manual focus system unless you have actually tried to focus manually with your DSLR.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's easy to focus, seeing as you don't really need to focus a 21mm lens. I'm a big nut where it comes to vintage manual focus lenses, so maybe I'm just being a snob, when I said "workable" I mean usable for consistently getting in-focus images of a moving subject that you have no opportunity to re-shoot.

Zeiss lenses do indeed have superior micro-contrast that makes them apparently sharper (acuity), but that doesn't actually make them resolve more detail where resolution is concerned. A Canon 100L macro and the Zeiss 100MP look basically identical even at f/2.8 on a test chart, but different in practice, however I'm talking from an objective point of view, where things like color don't matter.

Maybe the confusion is in the word "modern", by which I didn't simply imply "made in 2013", because is there plenty of crаp made even today; but the very best we have available today.

Kolor-Pikker wrote in post #16353352
Not this again.

I had a thought to write something, but another forum I visit has recently gotten over the whole D800E vs. MF bug, and I'd rather ignore this subject for a while.

I'll just say this - Instead of using phrases like "from what I hear", try the thing out for yourself, maybe you'll like it; I know people who own both and like both for different reasons. I myself would prefer to get into MF at the 60mp level, so I've been testing decidedly higher-end solutions as of late, but it would never be a replacement for a DSLR either.

I agree Kolor-Pikker!! Own, use and then comment about your experiences. Please don't just state what you've read or heard. We all would benefit from first hand and in the field use.

If you really want quality, I have a Leica 50mm f2 Summicron-R with adapter to EF (and focus confirm) that can sell to you for 15% of that price. Keep in mind that manual focus is the trademark of Leica and Zeiss, and Voigtlander.

Kolor-Pikker wrote in post #16353007
If there is reason to believe that this lens is made in Germany, then four grand sounds a lot more reasonable, compared now to Leica's offerings.

Don't knock Cosina, they have always made great products.

For $4000 I should be able to see the future through the lens. I don't care how sharp it is, that's an unjustifiable price to me.